Frankenstein? - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  Non-SMAC related
  Frankenstein?

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Frankenstein?

DanS posted 06-10-99 10:55 AM ET
OK, time for a thread about biotechnology. Is genetic modification a boon or bane for the modern world? Is it good for plants, animals, and humans? Is there anything "off-limits" to modification. To quote from the May 28, 1999 AGROW (a British publication):
AUSTRIA'S SALZBURG REGION TO STAY GMO FREE?
Lawyers at the nature protection sector of Salzburg's (Austria) federal government are preparing draft proposals aimed at banning the sowing of genetically modified seed in the region. As Salzburg is reknowned for its "natural and healthy" agricultural production, potential negative effects of gene technology on the environment should be prevented, says federal agriculture and nature protection Minister Sepp Eisl who initiated the campaign. Draft proposals should be finalised in the next few weeks.
What are the Austrians thinking? Are they out of their mind?
GaryD posted 06-10-99 11:31 AM ET
Makes perfect sense to me.
They are saying that given there is nothing wrong with the food they already have, there is no reason to take any risks with the environment, nor with their populous.
Let someone else be the guinea pig and pray that they aren't screwing up the whole world's environment.
Whilst it may be probable that nothing disastrous will happen, if it does, it could be devastating. And whilst they won't be able to make others see the problems, and keep this in the lab, they can at least ban it in their own country.
Tolls posted 06-10-99 11:31 AM ET
Why does this show the Austrians to be "out of their mind"?
Roland posted 06-10-99 12:22 PM ET
Some comments on the article:
Lawyers at the nature protection sector of Salzburg's (Austria) federal government...
That's the state (ie regional) government; agriculture is not a federal matter here...
...are preparing draft proposals aimed at banning the sowing of genetically modified seed in the region.
I know those plans, but there are some EU problems with that. I guess they'll move on regardless...
As Salzburg is reknowned for its "natural and healthy" agricultural production,
potential negative effects of gene technology on the environment should be prevented, says federal agriculture and nature protection Minister Sepp Eisl who initiated the campaign.
Sepp Eisl is the state minister... even after devolution, the Brits still have problems with federal systems...
What are the Austrians thinking? Are they out of their mind?
No, we're just a bunch of hillbillies...
Seriously, the reason is: Our farmers have gone for natural, high quality production. They definately can't compete on low prices/high volume - this is a mountain area, after all. Agriculture has been in this region for about 3.000 or so years now and has become part of the environmental balance; it also responsible for large parts of the countryside which has a huge importance for tourism. We do not want to scrap it, and we do not want to change it into an industry (which would only be possible in some regions).
To maintain agriculture on that basis, reputation is key. Therefore the ban to guarantee purity. No GM which might spread into non-GM planted fields (and no dioxin feeds etc. ).
In general:
GM food is a silly idea after all. The US lobby tells us that we need it to feed the world. Well, the industrialised countries have large surpluses, they don't need more. And in developing countries, other would improve harvests at lower costs. Not to mention the monopoly which the GM companies want to achieve.
Overall, it has risks we do not sufficiently understand and no benefit.
But isn't it cheaper ? Maybe, if everything goes well. If we get problems with it, the costs could be huge (and will be socialised). And the GM companies are looking for monopoly prices in that area, so the cost advantage will soon be gone if they have their way.
Trappist posted 06-12-99 04:44 AM ET
My opinion on GM food is very simple. Don't f#ck with the food chain.
Anyone else share the opinion that the scientists who say it's "perfectly safe" are the same ones who said in 1980 that a good food source for cattle would be minced-up sheep brains and spinal cords? Welcome to the Bovine-form CJD generation.
Provost Harrison posted 06-12-99 10:42 AM ET
Biotechnology needs to be used responsibility, and I have seen no proof of this from companies like Monsanto. Cross-pollination is the major problem, and a very major one indeed. I do doubt the validity of Pusztai's research, I really do not see how the introduction of a lectin protein into potatoes can actually cause this kind of damage. But this is not a reason to ignore these findings. It is a reason to extend investigations.
I think that the 'meddling in the realms of God' argument is bullsh*it, the simple fact is it is nothing more than 'right place, right time'. Organisms can uptake DNA and integrate it into their genome quite naturally. We are just more precise about it. But we cannot calculate the consequences. This is the problem.
Research should definitely continue, even if fish genes are introduced into tomatoes - DNA is DNA, protein is protein, the genetic code is universal. I guarantee you that the majority of your DNA will be the same as that of a plant. So is that unethical? Just pre-empting an attack here, that's all.
Corporations cannot be trusted to implement ethical use of such vital technology. Same as in agriculture and the mad-cow disease crisis. But people automatically blame the scientists. Blame the myopic corporations and the governments who turn a blind eye! I believe the majority of scientists (eg Richard Lacey), protested against this.
Spoe posted 06-12-99 11:33 AM ET
Probably safe, but not needed in most circumstances.
The one I have trouble ascribing to anything other than a phobia about radiation is irradiated meat, etc.
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: Frankenstein?
DanS	posted 06-10-99 10:55 AM ET OK, time for a thread about biotechnology. Is genetic modification a boon or bane for the modern world? Is it good for plants, animals, and humans? Is there anything "off-limits" to modification. To quote from the May 28, 1999 AGROW (a British publication): AUSTRIA'S SALZBURG REGION TO STAY GMO FREE? Lawyers at the nature protection sector of Salzburg's (Austria) federal government are preparing draft proposals aimed at banning the sowing of genetically modified seed in the region. As Salzburg is reknowned for its "natural and healthy" agricultural production, potential negative effects of gene technology on the environment should be prevented, says federal agriculture and nature protection Minister Sepp Eisl who initiated the campaign. Draft proposals should be finalised in the next few weeks. What are the Austrians thinking? Are they out of their mind?
GaryD	posted 06-10-99 11:31 AM ET Makes perfect sense to me. They are saying that given there is nothing wrong with the food they already have, there is no reason to take any risks with the environment, nor with their populous. Let someone else be the guinea pig and pray that they aren't screwing up the whole world's environment. Whilst it may be probable that nothing disastrous will happen, if it does, it could be devastating. And whilst they won't be able to make others see the problems, and keep this in the lab, they can at least ban it in their own country.
Tolls	posted 06-10-99 11:31 AM ET Why does this show the Austrians to be "out of their mind"?
Roland	posted 06-10-99 12:22 PM ET Some comments on the article: Lawyers at the nature protection sector of Salzburg's (Austria) federal government... That's the state (ie regional) government; agriculture is not a federal matter here... ...are preparing draft proposals aimed at banning the sowing of genetically modified seed in the region. I know those plans, but there are some EU problems with that. I guess they'll move on regardless... As Salzburg is reknowned for its "natural and healthy" agricultural production, potential negative effects of gene technology on the environment should be prevented, says federal agriculture and nature protection Minister Sepp Eisl who initiated the campaign. Sepp Eisl is the state minister... even after devolution, the Brits still have problems with federal systems... What are the Austrians thinking? Are they out of their mind? No, we're just a bunch of hillbillies... Seriously, the reason is: Our farmers have gone for natural, high quality production. They definately can't compete on low prices/high volume - this is a mountain area, after all. Agriculture has been in this region for about 3.000 or so years now and has become part of the environmental balance; it also responsible for large parts of the countryside which has a huge importance for tourism. We do not want to scrap it, and we do not want to change it into an industry (which would only be possible in some regions). To maintain agriculture on that basis, reputation is key. Therefore the ban to guarantee purity. No GM which might spread into non-GM planted fields (and no dioxin feeds etc. ). In general: GM food is a silly idea after all. The US lobby tells us that we need it to feed the world. Well, the industrialised countries have large surpluses, they don't need more. And in developing countries, other would improve harvests at lower costs. Not to mention the monopoly which the GM companies want to achieve. Overall, it has risks we do not sufficiently understand and no benefit. But isn't it cheaper ? Maybe, if everything goes well. If we get problems with it, the costs could be huge (and will be socialised). And the GM companies are looking for monopoly prices in that area, so the cost advantage will soon be gone if they have their way.
Trappist	posted 06-12-99 04:44 AM ET My opinion on GM food is very simple. Don't f#ck with the food chain. Anyone else share the opinion that the scientists who say it's "perfectly safe" are the same ones who said in 1980 that a good food source for cattle would be minced-up sheep brains and spinal cords? Welcome to the Bovine-form CJD generation.
Provost Harrison	posted 06-12-99 10:42 AM ET Biotechnology needs to be used responsibility, and I have seen no proof of this from companies like Monsanto. Cross-pollination is the major problem, and a very major one indeed. I do doubt the validity of Pusztai's research, I really do not see how the introduction of a lectin protein into potatoes can actually cause this kind of damage. But this is not a reason to ignore these findings. It is a reason to extend investigations. I think that the 'meddling in the realms of God' argument is bullsh*it, the simple fact is it is nothing more than 'right place, right time'. Organisms can uptake DNA and integrate it into their genome quite naturally. We are just more precise about it. But we cannot calculate the consequences. This is the problem. Research should definitely continue, even if fish genes are introduced into tomatoes - DNA is DNA, protein is protein, the genetic code is universal. I guarantee you that the majority of your DNA will be the same as that of a plant. So is that unethical? Just pre-empting an attack here, that's all. Corporations cannot be trusted to implement ethical use of such vital technology. Same as in agriculture and the mad-cow disease crisis. But people automatically blame the scientists. Blame the myopic corporations and the governments who turn a blind eye! I believe the majority of scientists (eg Richard Lacey), protested against this.
Spoe	posted 06-12-99 11:33 AM ET Probably safe, but not needed in most circumstances. The one I have trouble ascribing to anything other than a phobia about radiation is irradiated meat, etc.